1999 Mercury Cougar 2.5L V6 from North America

Summary:

A great and economical ride

Faults:

Oxygen Sensor replaced at 91,000 miles.

General Comments:

I am pleased with the gas mileage, engine performance, overall ride and dependability.

Over the course of 92,000 miles I have invested little to maintain the vehicle with oil changes and wheel repairs (due to my stupidity, potholes) being the only other expenditures throughout the life of the car.

I am frankly amazed that others have experienced problems with this low cost sports car that still runs as smooth as a top and performs quite well at almost the century mileage mark.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 14th January, 2005

10th Dec 2005, 14:45

I'm doing an econ project and would like to know as soon as possible, how much does a 1999 Mercury cougar waste on gasoline and whats the mileage?

11th Dec 2005, 08:54

Sounds like you're already starting from a position of bias, out to prove that a '99 Mercury Cougar "wastes" gas compared to something else that you have been assigned to show is better. Real scientists (i.e. ones that don't work for the tobacco industry) are impartial observers. Bias = F on your project. Go to http://www.fueleconomy.gov for listings of EPA mileage on vehicles over the last 20 years.

11th Dec 2005, 13:11

While the EPA offers some sort of guide, if you look at the history of the EPA and how they define "gas mileage" you will see it has no bearing on the real world. In fact, in a recent Autoweek article there were scientifically measured real-world variances of 25% or more from the gas numbers the EPA stated.

The EPA is, yet again, changing its measurement systems, so cars and SUVs are going to get even worse gas mileage on paper than before.

As for the term "waste", it is appropriate. You don't buy a Cougar of any vintage if gas mileage is your main concern. It may get good mileage for its class, but it ain't no Prius so therefore truly does waste fuel.

11th Dec 2005, 21:25

According to that website, a '99 Cougar with a 4-cyl. gets 34 mpg highway, and even with the 6-cyl. gets 28-31mpg highway (lower with the manual, higher with lock-up torque converter). Doesn't sound all that wasteful. Certainly not in the gas guzzler category.

1999 Mercury Cougar V-6 2.5 V6 from North America

Summary:

If its quality was only as good as its' looks!

Faults:

This car is very eye-catching, but its looks are deceiving! I could not afford much, so I purchased my cougar used with around 80,000 miles on it. I had to replace the battery after only 1 week! After having the car for only 3 weeks, the transmission started acting up, and sure enough had to be replaced. I had to get an oil leak fixed, and have 2 new motor mounts put in. Soon after that, the rack/pinion steering had to be replaced. My car is currently in shop because the alternator went out, but not before it fried the computer brain!!! So, as soon as I save up another $1200 dollars, I can get my deceitful eye-catcher out of the shop. Who knows what will go wrong next? But I have a good feeling it'll be another transmission!

General Comments:

My window switches act as if they have a loose connection, only working part of the time. My headlight switch had to be re-placed due too bad wiring. The seats in my car have worn terribly!!! Occasionally my car starter makes a noise when you try to start the car. The dealer said that my starter was good though. They cannot seem to duplicate the problem. When it is cold outside and I start my cougar, the engine makes short "groaning" sound. my trunk release has not worked since I bought the car, the trunk lid seems to be too heavy, and it re latches itself immediately. This car is a beautiful car! (Mine is white with tint, sunroof, V-6,spoiler, etc) however its looks are very deceiving to its actual quality. Please be cautious if you are planning on purchasing a cougar, i don't recommend it. However, if you are overtaken by the look of it like I was, then I wish you the best of luck!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 15th December, 2004

11th Jan 2005, 16:16

Sounds like the previous owner should get the bad review! Any car that's had the snot kicked out of it would react the same way - I've seen the same car go over 175,000 miles with just oil changes, tires, and regular book maintenance. But buyer beware!